Yet another lateral thinking puzzle

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Is it significant that the arm was buried in the woods as opposed to being buried someplace else?

Were A and B medical doctors?

Did X, A, and/or B ever have more than two arms?

[theeye]

Ok, I have a guess of sorts. Those who don't wish to read it may close their eyes.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Were the three of them in a situation in which they were shipwrecked or otherwise stranded and starving? And A and B agreed to let X, the only doctor in the group, amputate one arm from each of them to be eaten by the three in order to survive? And A and B extracted a promise from X that if they were ever rescued, he would have his own arm amputated as well?

[theworm[$]]

OOOH! Eye - you're good! That must be it! You're so smart.

If that's not it, were these guys related to the blind guy on the train?

[soxfan[$]]

Please clarify which of the two questions you are answering with 'No'. It would have made just as much sense to send it to B first.

Was there a significant lapse of time (years) between A's and B's amputations and X's? No.

Is it significant that B buried the arm instead of, say, cremating it? No.

Am I correct, then, in presuming that A and B entered into a deal of sorts with X in which X agreed to have his own arm amputated (and to provide proof that he had done so) in return for A and B agreeing to allow X to amputate their arms? Yes.

Was there any other compensation or consideration given by any party to the deal? No.

Were there any parties to the deal other than A, B and X? No.

Was the deal proposed by X? Irrelevant.

Or by A and/or B? Irrelevant.

Was X's motivation that he wanted to perform arm amputations? No.
Or did he want A and B specifically to have their arms amputated? Yes.

(In the above two questions, I'm trying to find out if he cared more about the process or the result.)

Is it significant that the arm was buried in the woods as opposed to being buried someplace else? No.

Were A and B medical doctors? No.

Did X, A, and/or B ever have more than two arms? No.

[soxfan[$]]

Were the three of them in a situation in which they were shipwrecked or otherwise stranded and starving? And A and B agreed to let X, the only doctor in the group, amputate one arm from each of them to be eaten by the three in order to survive? And A and B extracted a promise from X that if they were ever rescued, he would have his own arm amputated as well?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Yes! The three men (in the version I read) were in a plane crash, and eventually became desperate enough to resort to cannibalism. Being a man of his word, X had his arm amputated by another doctor, and sent it to A as proof that he held up his end of their pact. Nicely done. :thumbs:

If that's not it, were these guys related to the blind guy on the train?